Kugelmass

Verdi String Quartet

Hi, Kugelmass. I'm not new to Wikipedia, but being human I sometimes act inappropriately. I had no need to talk about this being self-serving, and I apologise for that. The article was about the quartet, not about recordings of it, although I agree that information about the recordings is useful and can be included, but not in the lead paragraph, somewhere lower down. However, I disagree with the statement about the Juilliard bringing it back from obscurity. The first recording I owned was of the string orchestral version, which I bought in 1973 or 1974. It was played by, from memory, I Solisti Veneti. I heard numerous other performances of the original string quartet version many times on radio over the years, well before 1992. JackofOz 02:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I had a discussion with my cello teacher concerning the Verdi Quartet some time ago. It would seem that I took his words of praise for the JSQ recording to heart without doing the homework myself. Thank you for the correction.

I took a brief look at your user page. I might have a lead on your Godowsky recording. Besides the quite innaccessible copy at the Oxford music archives, I have good reason to believe there's one at Northwestern here in Chicago. A good friend of mine works there as an assistant librarian... I'll tell you if anything turns up. It was nice to have met you, JackofOz. Please let me know if I can be of any help, whether it be editing, research, or otherwise.Kugelmass 07:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

If there is another recording, that would be very good news indeed. I remain utterly baffled as to why this piece isn't in every virtuoso pianist's repertoire. Maybe we can change that someday. Thanks for the support. Cheers. JackofOz 23:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I already have an LP copy of the Godowsky recording, which is how I came by knowledge of the piece in the first place. It's other recordings (if they exist) that I'm interested in digging up. I've re-rewritten that bit on my user page to make this clearer. Cheers. JackofOz 01:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Whoops

Sorry about the delay. Everything should be okay now. DS 02:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about it— it wasn't your fault. Thank You. Kugelmass 02:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

PDF identified

Hi again

That pdf didn't want to completely download for me. It only got to 21 of 42 pages, then stopped. But at least I was able to read the title page, which says:

Grand Trio pour le pianoforte, clarinette ou violin et violoncelle concertans composé et dedié à Madame Josèphe Turnhammer par Adalbert Gyrovetz, Op.43

Or in plain-speak:

Trio for piano, clarinet and cello (or piano, violin and cello), Op.43 by Adalbert Gyrowetz, dedicated to Madame Josèphe Turnhammer.

Our article on Gyrowetz doesn't seem to reflect his prolific composing, including over 30 operas and 60 symphonies (some of which were at one time attributed to Haydn). I'll make some changes. Thanks for reminding me about him. Cheers JackofOz 01:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Armando Reveron

Sorry I neglected to post a link. It's here: [[1]] KD Tries Again 14:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)KD

Orphaned non-free image File:Sir Charles.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sir Charles.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 01:04, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Drostan 325.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Drostan 325.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 23:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:VermeerQuartet.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:VermeerQuartet.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Courcelles 21:38, 21 July 2011 (UTC)